we need two tax systems in this country; one with higher rates for the liberals, and one with lower rates for conservatives. Since the liberal aholes want higher rates anyway, they should be happy with this.

And, in return for our lower tax rates, we conservatives will agree to only participate in the bare minimum of government services. Most of the idiotically excessive governmental regulations will only apply to the liberals, and conservatives can opt out, thereby reducing the burden on the government.

LOL, this is the Democrats biggest fear - - the government shuts down and nobody notices except their base of bums, deadbeats, and parasites!

Not everybody who gets government assistance is a 'bum, deadbeat, or parasite.' It doesn't help our cause to speak as if they all are. There truly are people who warrant charity being in need at no fault of their own; it's just that we shouldn't be using an armed monopolist government agency to dispense said "charity" by means of coercion.

8
posted on 06/30/2011 10:59:54 PM PDT
by Carry_Okie
(GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")

Do you really think people would care if they could only get a driver’s license or registration just M-Th at a DMV? Hell, I’ve done it online the last 6 years running. I don’t even need to see an Purple People Beater.

Obama was making a speech about all the Taxes he pays and that he understands how some of nasty rich people balk at their Tax Liability. (BTW - Clinton did the same thing bragging about how rich he was and that he didn't “need” the Bush Tax Rate Cuts).

Not one Reporter asked either Obama or Clinton if they Itemized to save on their Tax Liability. That would have been a wonderful moment in Journalism if the question was asked.

13
posted on 06/30/2011 11:11:06 PM PDT
by Kickass Conservative
(If Sarah Palin was President, you would have a job by now.)

Is this kind of like a mini-debt talks between Obozo and the Repub House/Dem Senate?

I see Obozo didn't want to meet with McConnell but found plenty of time to meet with the RAT Reid.

I say, hold your stand GOP - there is no compromise in WAR. There can only be one winner and one loser. I do not want to wake up one morning only to hear that Boehner gave away the farm - he is holding a royal flush right now. NO to any rise in the debt ceiling - Obozo will just ignore it anyway and go right on spending. WHO WILL STOP HIM? Huh? Who?

It might be the only way to keep this country together. Why have no politicians proposed this I wonder. They might bring up “equal protection under the law”, but this would be a voluntary trade-off, where everyone gets what they want. Liberals get higher taxes and more government (for them, which they want) and conservatives get lower taxes and left the hell alone by the gangster government (which we want). as you say, it is pure genius.

You know, what should steam every single liberal thug in Minnesota is that while a lot of them are shut out of work during the shutdown (which of course they’ll be paid for no work at the other side of it...) is that Gov. Mike Dayton has decided that the staff at the Governor’s mansion is a ‘critical need.’

Lord help him if he had to wash his own toilets for a couple days, or if the garden had a few leaves, or that personal chef was unemployed for a few days... Liberals - Shared sacrifice means ‘you’re making it too hard to reach into your wallet!’

18
posted on 06/30/2011 11:47:57 PM PDT
by kingu
(Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)

Charity is not government’s role. Charity is the Church’s roll. It comes from us, from the community, from the families. Government charity is largely mis-allocated. Church/community/family is not mis-allocated, and it even sometimes comes with strings attached and requires those receiving charity to change their behavior, behave responsibly, or give back in some manner.

Government charity does not. Government charity is a handout, and we see it doesn’t work - it doesn’t encourage responsibility, just a larger lust for more and more charity from the government.

Government should not be in the charity business. We want off the rails many decades ago in this regard.

“Do you really think people would care if they could only get a drivers license or registration just M-Th at a DMV?”

Oh there are people who would care alright - - AND complain about it!

In late April the day after tornadoes devastated northern Alabama and power was out across most of it I saw people going to their mailboxes looking for that days mail. A friend of mine works for the Post Office (those who could make it in were required to report to work) told me that people were phoning and stopping by her location complaining about how they didn't get their mail.

Hello you Morons! People have died, neighborhoods destroyed, TVA hit, most of the area didn't have any power whatsoever (and we didn't know when we were getting it back) and you are upset about not getting mail delivery!??!!!

24
posted on 07/01/2011 12:31:56 AM PDT
by proudofthesouth
(Democratic Party - The party of genocide.)

The fact is, Republican taxpayers feed money at gunpoint to Democrat politicians so they can use that money to buy the votes of their government-addicted base. If government “shuts down”, then it is reasonable to assume the Democrat politicians are in no position to buy votes.

Anyway, it’s hilarious how, when the government “shuts down”, there always seems to be a way to keep “essential services” running. It makes me want government to shut down forever, with only “essential services” continuing. Privatize everything else.

We now have 3, count em, 3 presidential candidates from MN. 2 too many, if you ask me. Wonder how this fight will affect Pawlenty, Bachmann, and McCotter? I predict we’re going to hear a lot of boring questions from the MSM about MN finances in future.

The linked story tells me that the Republicans control the legislature, that the Governor is a democrat, that they disagree over the budget, and that the resulting impasse is shutting down the government.

The question is, did the Republican legislature pass a budget or not? That is, is MN government shutting down because the legislature hasn't done its job, or because the Governor vetoed the budget and is holding everything hostage to extort higher taxes?

If the Repubs have passed a budget and the Governor has vetoed it, the shutdown is on his head, period.

Mpls. Star Tribune story: ". . .The union-backed Alliance for a Better Minnesota, a key factor in Dayton's campaign last year, will run radio ads over the weekend in Bemidji, Brainerd and Duluth, focusing on reaching Minnesotans vacationing at the lakes."

Alliance for a Better Minnesota is funded heavily by Dayton money, notably from one of Dayton's ex-wives, Alida Messinger.

. . .Despite what you may have heard, a government shutdown is not necessary. The Republican budget as passed by the Minnesota Legislature in May funded government operations, providing an increase in spending. Gov. Mark Dayton vetoed it.

At $34 billion, the Republican budget is the largest in state history. It is $4 billion more than the state raised in revenue for the current biennium. But it's not enough for Gov. Dayton. Gov. Dayton wants to raise taxes to grow government.

The problem with Gov. Dayton's budget is that it does not exist. Since revising his tax proposal a month ago, the governor has failed to identify how he would spend the $1.8 billion in additional revenue. Thus far he has not proposed any reductions in spending to close the budget gap. Even with his increased tax burden on small business owners and job providers, Gov. Dayton still doesn't have the money to fund his proposed spending.

His non-existent plan isn't anything he or his administration is apparently worried about. During a recent Commission on Planning and Fiscal Policy meeting, the Minnesota Management and Budget Commissioner said a plan did not exist. That simple statement defines the governor's. He has no plan. He just wants to raise taxes, and he is getting ready to shut down government in a careless attempt to force the issue.

This man has had a balanced budget sitting on his desk for TWO MONTHS and did not sign it. The Republican Legislature did its job.

And to the poster who asked if we’d mind if we could only get drivers’ licenses Monday through Thursday, the answer is yes, I’d mind, because my state taxes pay for service.

The analogy of a natural disaster does not apply here because there isn’t a natural disaster. What we have is a petulant child posing as a governor who is holding his breath in the hopes Minnesota will turn blue.

There truly are people who warrant charity being in need at no fault of their own;

I don't disagree with your statement, but this line of thinking doesn't help matters either. Charity isn't something the government should be involved with, that is the providence of family, friends, churches, etc. Charity isn't taking money from one group and giving it to another.

38
posted on 07/01/2011 5:08:44 AM PDT
by voicereason
(The U.S.A. doesn't need sex......Obama is already screwing the country daily.)

How-——————noble of you. The poster was talking about bums, deadbeats and parasites who steal trillions of dollars annually via fraudulent claims.

Of course there are truly needy people out there. The challenge is to find ways to help them in the short term and get them working in the longer term. Inherent in this task is to return responsibility for them to the communities in which they reside. This promotes accountability. If those communities are dysfunctional then these people need to be relocated to places where there is work. If they refuse they get no money. Certtainly they could displace the illegals working in this country. It really is as simple as that.

Compassion is not rewarding slothful, albeit criminal, behavior. Compassion is getting these people to work, dontcha think?

There truly are people who warrant charity being in need at no fault of their own; it's just that we shouldn't be using an armed monopolist government agency to dispense said "charity" by means of coercion.

ALL government is coercive. My post not only covers the feds, but also state and local government, where your "Not Yours to Give" argument does not apply.

40
posted on 07/01/2011 5:30:59 AM PDT
by Carry_Okie
(GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")

Instead of looking at their feet and mumbling about a 6% increase in government, every GOP legislator should proudly proclaim their opposition to the kind of increased government spending that has bankrupted our future and put us on a fiscal footing one step above Greece.

Editorials across the state recognize that Governor Dayton is reneging on his pledge to avoid a government shutdown.

Citizens recognize that Dayton is playing shutdown politics by not calling a special session and by refusing to close out budget program areas that are agreed upon.

It seems some Republicans are snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.

We have principled leaders who are squared off against a weak, erratic governor who was a failure as a U.S. Senator and who won his seat by a margin of only 8,000 votes.

And we have GOP legislators out there talking about new revenues!?

So what happens if a budget deal comes together that includes hundreds of millions or even a billion in new revenues?

Those who exhorted the GOP to compromise by larding another billion on to the budget will go out and do what they did in 2010 - work and vote for DFL candidates.

Independents, who swung hard to the GOP in 2010 for fiscal reasons, will once again be up for grabs because the GOP failed to deliver on their central promise, feeding
the cynicism so many independents feel regarding the state of our politics.

And the GOP base will be left demoralized, disappointed, and dispirited. After being forced to swallow the turd of double digit spending increases, we’ll be given a
small breath mint entitled, “well, at least we didn’t raise income taxes.”

Taking away tax deductions is a tax increase for those who lose it. Expanding the sales tax in a way that generates more revenue is a tax increase. Minnesota doesn’t
need tax increases, no matter the form. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

The state has enjoyed an average spending growth rate of 21% percent since 1960. It is time for government to yield to the reality of our dire fiscal situation.

This is the best opportunity Republicans have had in the modern era to craft the kind of limited, efficient, and transparent government that defines the essence
of our collective conservative values.

To lose this opportunity to Governor Dayton and the Democrats would be an infamy almost beyond comprehension.

This is a defining moment in the career of all 109 Republican legislators.

How-noble of you. The poster was talking about bums, deadbeats and parasites who steal trillions of dollars annually via fraudulent claims.

Nobility has nothing to do with it. When we speak in public with such a broad brush or post on a board without qualification people build perceptions of us. It is politically foolish to use such imagery.

The challenge is to find ways to help them in the short term and get them working in the longer term.

There are adults out there who cannot walk, speak, or use a toilet.

Compassion is not rewarding slothful, albeit criminal, behavior. Compassion is getting these people to work, dontcha think?

Compassion is a private matter. Charity is ruined by government. Doncha think?

45
posted on 07/01/2011 5:38:52 AM PDT
by Carry_Okie
(GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")

The guy is medicated already, IIRC. He had numerous opportunities to call a special session and pass ‘lights on’ bills. He failed to do so. He had numerous opportunities to call a special session and fund parts of government on which there was agreement. He failed to do so.

Both the GOP House and Senate budget targets propose to spend just over $34 billion in the upcoming budget cycle. That’s a fact.

The next fact is that the state will spend about $30 billion in the current budget cycle, which ended June 30.

Any first grader can tell you that these numbers mean that the GOP intends to INCREASE spending in the next budget cycle, not CUT spending.

The numbers make for about a proposed 13% increase in state spending.

Only in leftist government world does a 13% INCREASE in government equal to a “severe cut”.

The cause for panic amongst the Marxist set was the annual release of the Minnesota Tax Incidence Study published by the Minnesota Department of Revenue (DOR).

The study causes lawmakers and policy makers to sit up and take notice because it is thorough, accurate, reputable, and professional. The study is put together everyyear by a team of non-partisan tax professionals at DOR who enjoy a reputation forunbiased and objective work in an area that inevitably attracts emotional and vitriolic rhetoric.

The same reputation for professional and unbiased work, unfortunately, isn’t enjoyed by the “journalists” who toil at the liberal rags that pass for newspapers and legitimatepublic policy web sites.

They shrieked their collective horror at the study’s conclusion that the top 10% of income earners in Minnesota pay 10.3% of their income in state and local taxeswhile the other 90% pay 12.3%.

This news, of course, drives liberals nuts because in their world, successful peopleshould be punished while the less successful should be rewarded. The lever for thatbalancing is the government, which is asleep at the switch, in their view.

Inevitably, the news over the next days and weeks will be filled with calls by the DFL and their media allies to “balance” the state’s increasingly “regressive” tax system by raising taxes on job creators and, by the way, bringing some more moolah into state coffers to help sustain those double digit spending hikes that are so critical to the government economy that sustains liberal politicians by sustaining their political patrons (e.g. teacher unions and the social services industrial complex).

The dirty secret is that these outlets are cherry picking the data and not telling the full story.

There are two ways that a tax system becomes more regressive. The first is to cut taxes for those at the top of the income distribution ladder. The other way is to increase taxes for those at the bottom.

All taxes aren’t created equal. Some are progressive in nature while others are regressive.

A system has been created to measure taxes on this continuum. The “Suits Index” is a system that tells us which taxes are progressive and which are regressive and how much so.

Check out the taxes that are most regressive:

· Tobacco taxes;

· Minnesota’s “sick tax” to fund state health care;

· Utility taxes;

· Gasoline taxes;

· Estate taxes;

· Gambling taxes;

· General sales taxes;

· Corporate taxes (which in some fashion are passed to consumers).

Think about it. Dems have participated in raising just about every one of these taxes in the recent past. And then they turn around and cry foul over a system that has become more regressive.

Now there are two way to fix this “problem,” if that’s what you think should be done from a public policy perspective.

You could adopt the rat plan, which is to raise progressive taxes, meaning the income tax, and therefore bring more money into government.

The alternative is to cut regressive taxes, which is what House Speaker Kurt Zellers suggested in response to the media breathlessly demanding his reaction to the newsthat job creators and other successful people aren’t ponying up their “fair share.”

Are the wealthy paying up when it comes to taxes?

Take the income tax, for example.

When broken down by decile, you can see that the successful pay the majority of the income tax. And the less motivated amongst us?

The bottom 10% don’t pay ANY income taxes. In fact, they get back from the state over $17 million through refundable credits and other goodies.

The next 10% pay NO income taxes and receive $23 million in refunds.

The next 10% pay in, net, a little over $4 million, which is less than 1% of the total income tax collected.

The next 10% pay, net, about $80 million, about 1.1% of the total.

The next 10% pay, net, about $207 million, about 3% of the total.

The next 10% pay , net, about $357 million, about 5% of the total.

The next 10%, net, pay about $526 million, about 7.5% of the total.

The next 10%, net, pay about $788 million, about 11% of the total.

The next 10% pay, net, about $1.2 BILLION, about 17% of the total.

The next 10% pay, net, about $4 BILLION, about 56% of the total.

Put another way, the top 20% (those with household incomes above $90,000 per year) pay nearly three-quarters of the income tax while the bottom 20% pay nothing and even get something back.

Put another way, the top 5% of households (households income above $183,000) pay about 43% of the income tax.

Put yet another way, the top 1% (household incomes above $430,000 per year) payabout 25% of the income tax.

That is what the media won’t be telling you about Minnesota’s tax burden.

Are the successful paying their fair share? They most certainly are and then some.

If the DFL wants a more progressive system, maybe they ought to rethink all the regressive taxes they’ve embraced to satisfy other elements of their constituency.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.